Retired Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Police, ALHAJI MOHAMMED USAINI GUMEL, is a security expert, who served the Nigeria Police Force and the nation for over three decades, in various capacities, including Assistant Inspector-General of Police in-charge of Training and Development; Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Zone 7, Abuja; Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Community Policing, Force Headquarters; and DIG Force Intelligence Department (FID), Nigeria Police Force Headquarters Abuja, a position he held before his retirement.
His retirement from the Nigeria Police Force, did not make him tired as a security expert. Today, he is the National Secretary of a Non Governmental Organization(NGO), Project 774 Network, currently helping the Federal Government to proffer solutions to security threats, across the nooks and crannies of Nigeria.
In this interview, he spoke on the recent deaths of 37 detainees, who were arrested as illegal miners in Niger state. They were arrested and detained by operatives from the Niger state Command of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defense Corps.
Excerpts:
How do you feel over the reported deaths of 37 persons in custody of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defense Corps (NSCDC), Niger state Command?
First, I extend my heartfelt condolences to the families of the 37 persons who reportedly died while in the custody of the Niger State Command of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps. I also sympathize with the Emir of Minna, the Government and people of Niger State, and Nigerians generally. May Almighty Allah forgive the deceased, grant them Jannatul Firdaus and give their families the strength to bear this painful loss.
This is a grave security and human-rights matter. The Federal Government was right to order an independent investigation and require the preservation of evidence. The investigation must now be prompt, transparent and driven by facts. It must establish how the arrests were conducted, the conditions of detention, the medical condition of each detainee, the precise cause and time of each death, and whether any officer, commander or other person acted unlawfully or negligently.
Illegal mining is a serious security and economic crime, but law enforcement must always remain within the law. Every person in custody is under the protection of the state.
To be candid, my immediate reaction to that unfortunate incident was shock and deep concern. One death in custody demands explanation; 37 deaths demand the highest level of scrutiny. We should not reach conclusions before the evidence is examined, but the scale of the incident makes a thorough and independent investigation unavoidable.
The families deserve the truth, the public deserves accountability and the NSCDC itself needs a credible process that separates verified facts from speculation.
Do you think the Federal Government’s response to the incident was quick, adequate and decicive?
The decision to establish an independent committee, suspend affected personnel and direct the preservation of records is an important first step. But the real test is implementation.
Investigators must have unrestricted access to the detention facility, custody registers, arrest records, duty rosters, communication logs, medical records, surviving detainees and all officers involved. The findings should be made public within the limits of the law, and any evidence of criminal conduct must be referred promptly for prosecution.
Do you believe the investigation process would be truly independent when security officials are involved?
The independence of the investigation process will be judged by conduct, not merely by the committee’s title. The investigators must be free from interference, protect witnesses and preserve the chain of custody for every piece of evidence.
Medical and forensic conclusions should come from qualified professionals. Representatives of the affected community and the Civil Society Organizations should be able to follow the process. Most importantly, no institution should investigate itself and then expect the public to accept an untested conclusion.
What are the most important facts and findings the investigators must establish?
They must establish who authorized the operation; where, when and why each person was arrested; how many people entered custody alive; the size and condition of the detention space; who supervised the detainees; whether food, water, ventilation and medical care were provided; when distress was first noticed; what action officers took; and the medically established cause of every death.
They must also determine whether records were altered, evidence was concealed or anyone attempted to obstruct the investigation.
There are several claims about the cause of deaths. What is your position?
My position is that no unverified explanation should be presented as fact. Claims of illness, suffocation, assault, chemical exposure or any other cause must be tested through proper forensic and medical examination. Rumours can inflame tension and may also prejudice the investigation.
The correct approach is to preserve the bodies and relevant samples where possible, examine the scene, interview witnesses separately and allow the evidence to establish what happened.
Does the NSCDC have the power to arrest suspected illegal miners?
Yes. But the legal route must be stated carefully. The Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act 2007 places the regulation, inspection and direct enforcement of mining operations primarily with the Ministry responsible for solid minerals, particularly, the Mines Inspectorate and authorized officers of the Ministry. The Act does not name the NSCDC as a Mines Officer. The NSCDC relies on its own enabling law: the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps Act 2003, as amended in 2007.
That law gives the Corps responsibility for protecting critical national assets and infrastructure, together with powers to arrest, detain, investigate and institute proceedings by or in the name of the Attorney-General of the Federation. The NSCDC may, therefore, act against suspected illegal mining within that mandate, but its officers must obey constitutional safeguards, custody rules and every other limit imposed by law.
How does the Mining Marshals arrangement fit into that legal structure?
The Mining Marshals are a specialized NSCDC unit operating under a Federal Government inter-agency arrangement with the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development. The Ministry retains overall policy responsibility, and the Marshals work with Federal Mines Officers to combat illegal mining. In practice, they may gather intelligence, conduct operations, arrest suspects and secure or seal suspected illegal sites within the limits of the law.
Any alleged mining offence must still be grounded in the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act 2007 and the Mining Regulations 2011. The June 2026 operation in Niger State, in which the Mining Marshals reportedly sealed seven suspected illegal mineral buying and processing centres, illustrates that joint enforcement role.
The simple distinction is that the Marshals’ arrest and investigative powers come from the NSCDC Act; they do not become Mines Inspectorate officers merely because the suspected offences arise under the mining laws. In every case, the power to arrest is never a power to punish.
Some people say those who died in detention were illegal miners and, therefore, responsible for their own situation. What is your position on this?
That argument is unacceptable. Illegal mining must be confronted because it damages the economy, funds criminal networks, destroys the environment and can worsen insecurity.
However, a suspected offence does not remove a person’s constitutional rights. Security agencies gain legitimacy by enforcing the law lawfully. We can be firm against illegal mining while insisting that every suspect is treated humanely and brought before a court.
If at the end of investigation, negligence is established, who is to be blamed?
Responsibility, blame and purnishment must follow the evidence through the entire chain of the Command. Investigators should examine the conduct of the arresting team, detention officers, duty supervisors, medical personnel where applicable and commanders who authorized or supervised the operation.
Individual criminal responsibility must not be hidden behind institutional language. At the same time, command responsibility should be examined where leaders knew, ought reasonably to have known or failed to take necessary action.
Are suspensions and protective custody enough to purnish the officers at the main time?
Suspensions and protective custody are temporary administrative measures, not a final determination of guilt. They can protect the integrity of the investigation by preventing interference with witnesses or records.
But they must not become a substitute for a criminal investigation. If the evidence discloses criminal acts, the suspects should be investigated under the proper legal process, charged where the evidential threshold is met and given a fair trial.
What should be done as compensation for the families of the deceased?The first duty is to identify every deceased person accurately and notify the families with dignity. Families should receive reliable information, access to lawful documentation and an opportunity to participate appropriately in identification and forensic processes.
Where state responsibility, negligence or unlawful conduct is established, there should be prompt compensation and other forms of redress. Financial compensation, however, cannot replace truth, accountability and measures that prevent recurrence.
How should the authorities manage public anger in Niger State?
The authorities should communicate early, honestly and consistently. Peaceful expression must be respected, while violence, destruction and reprisal attacks must be prevented through lawful and proportionate measures.
Traditional rulers, community leaders, religious leaders, youth representatives and Civil Society Organizations should be engaged. Silence and contradictory statements create suspicion. Credible information and visible accountability are the best ways to reduce tension and preserve public confidence.
What broader reforms are required to prevent deaths in custody?
Nigeria needs enforceable national custody standards across all agencies. Every detention facility should have accurate electronic and physical registers, functioning cameras where lawful, occupancy limits, proper ventilation, access to water and medical screening, scheduled supervisory inspections and clear emergency procedures.
Arresting officers and detention officers must receive regular training. Independent bodies should conduct unannounced inspections, and every death in custody should trigger an immediate forensic investigation and mandatory external review.
Is there one practical measure that can be activated for immediate response?
Yes. One measure that can work very well is the full activation of the Police Duty Solicitor Scheme, known as the PDSS. It is an important initiative supported and sustained by successive Inspectors-General of Police, bringing together the key institutions of the criminal-justice system and all security and law-enforcement agencies.
The scheme gives arrested persons early access to legal assistance, enables prompt review of arrests and detention conditions, and creates an independent safeguard against unlawful or prolonged detention. I saw its practical value firsthand when I served as Commissioner of Police in Kano State from 2023 to 2024. It worked very well for us by improving coordination, encouraging lawful custody management and resolving cases that should not remain in detention.
The PDSS should, therefore, be activated and strengthened in every state and extended effectively across all detention facilities operated by security agencies.
Could this incident potentially damage confidence in the NSCDC and other security agencies?
Yes, if it is handled poorly. Public confidence depends not on pretending that institutions never fail, but on showing that alleged failures are investigated honestly and corrected. A transparent process protects both citizens and professional officers. It prevents collective blame, identifies the individuals and systems responsible and demonstrates that no security agency is above the law.
As a retired Deputy Inspector General of Police, are you not taking sides against another security agency?
No. My position supports professional security service. Supporting the NSCDC or any security agency does not mean excusing possible misconduct. Equally, defending the rights of detainees does not mean supporting illegal mining.
A disciplined institution welcomes credible investigation because accountability strengthens command, protects responsible officers and builds the public trust needed for effective security work.
What result would convince you that the investigation is credible?
A credible outcome would identify every deceased person, establish the medically supported cause and circumstances of each death, explain the full chain of events, name those responsible where the evidence permits and recommend specific criminal, disciplinary and administrative action.
It should also provide redress for affected families and produce reforms with clear deadlines, responsible institutions and public reporting. The report must lead to action, not remain on a shelf.
What is your message to the investigators, government and Nigerians over the unfortunate incident?
My final message is simple. Let the facts be established quickly and independently. Let the families be treated with dignity. Let every person found responsible face the law, and let the lessons produce lasting reform. Nigeria must continue to fight illegal mining and other threats to national security, but our security agencies must always act within the Constitution and the law.
Supporting security agencies does not mean excusing misconduct, and defending human rights does not mean supporting crime. Accountability and effective security must go together.